Just some rambling on the "intellectual dark web"... after watching Piers Morgan have Sean Carroll and Eric Weinstein debate.

I used to think Eric Weinstein was a reasonable and smart person. As I did Sam Harris and Doug Murray and Jordan Peterson. Back around 2016 with the "intellectual dark web". I agreed with them all about identity politics, political correctness, free speech, wokeness, etc.

But all of these people have fallen in my estimation.

Eric Weinstein is embarrassing. Like a child desperately trying to prove he is smart. Sticking to some ideas he had in college but isn't smart enough to put together anymore... desperately trying to make his mark on the world and prove himself. Hoping physics works in a way to make us multiplanetary rather than taking reality for what it is. I watched part of a video of him lecturing to a classroom. Except there were no questions from students, no coughs, no sniffles, no sounds of paper shuffling... I'm pretty sure he was videoing himself lecturing to an empty classroom. And his scatterbrain couldn't keep on any one subject he would say something he thought was deep and profound and then jump to something else without connecting his ideas. And he blames physics gatekeepers for blocking out his ideas. Sad, really sad. He has some great abilities to think out of the box, but too far out and disconnected, pathologically so. His brother Bret is far more healthy. I'm sure his wife has a major stabizing influence on him. He's not always right, but he's can explain himself coherently, his thinking remains connected, and his creativity is properly bounded by logic and reason and data.

Sam Harris I can't even be bothered to critique here. But I don't think he is worthy of being listened to.

Douglas Murray... just listen to his Joe Rogan episode with Dave Smith. I found Dave Smith through that, and I learned who Douglas Murray really is... two improvements in one.

Jordan Peterson started to look bad when he tried to redefine "truth" and redefine everything in terms of Jungian theory and "stories". I think he helped lost young men, to his credit, and I am absolutely on his side about the Canadian law of compelled speech. But he started to fall off my radar when he started tweeting "Glass Gaza", and went on about how great Europe is and European things... and how other cultures essentially suck. And then his latest debate with 20 athiests was enlightening.

Anyhow... the intellectual dark web wasn't really very intellectual. I'm glad they pushed back against the cultural woke nonsense when they did, but each member is not really the intelligent person they might have appeared to be at the time. Never could compete with the intellectual prowess of the new athiests: Daniel Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens.

Its intellectual theatre, not much dark about it, nor coherent. However, we ask a lot out of these figures when perfection is out of reach for all of us. At least they, along with some others, paint a tapestry closer to truth than the mainstream surrealiam we are expected to except in order to be part of polite society.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

speak for yourself sonny boy. perfection is out of reach for YOU.

i am perfect. everybody knows that. i am not being ironic.

Everybody has faults. We all get stuff wrong. And if these guys just got stuff wrong, that's not a big deal.

What I have a bigger problem with is sticking to what you got wrong after you should very well know that you got it wrong. This is a psychological sunk-cost fallacy though. Once you make statements publicly, people tend to stick to them and defend them even after they should have admitted fault and moved on.

All of these characters have gone WAY too far with ideas and narratives that are bunk and can't turn the ship around.

Eric should have long ago realized that his theory either wasn't great, or that he doesn't have what it takes to refine it to the level it needs to be considered by working physicists. Instead he blames and bad mouths the field.

I agree with all this but what we are witnessing is a constant in the intellectual space. This is why they say progress happens one funeral at a time. In this case, they are highly visible intellectuals. Imagine what it would be like if they had positions of power in universities, they would hold back progress at their institutions with their pet ideas for decades and nobody would know the source of resistance.

I agree with that.

But I think Eric is playing a scam. He's trying to get $$$ from the government. He wants the government to pay money to "blue sky" research, meaning "I have a crazy idea, fund me" and "fuck you Physics gatekeepers!" for not letting me in on the payola. Maybe my understanding is incorrect, but this is what it seems like to me. Bitch, drag people through the dirt, until they pay you to shut up or fund your silly idea that you can't even describe coherently.

Its a symptom of a greater problem, but yes, either he's a grifter or unaware of his mental incapability